Pr. Commissioner Of Income Tax-6, Delhi v. M/S Mvr Consultants Pvt. Ltd
High Court
13 Apr 2018 In favour of: Assessee
Forum / Bench
High Court · dhcdb
Parties
Pr. Commissioner Of Income Tax-6, Delhi v. M/S Mvr Consultants Pvt. Ltd
Date of order
13 Apr 2018
Assessment year(s)
2005-06
Outcome
Dismissed
Case summary
In Pr. Commissioner Of Income Tax-6, Delhi v. M/S Mvr Consultants Pvt. Ltd, the High Court (2018) dismissed the appeal. The decision went in favour of the assessee.
Decision: The appeal is, as such, unmerited and consequently dismissed.
Summary auto-generated from the order below — read the full judgment for the complete reasoning.
Sections referenced in this judgment
The order — as passed by the High Court
$~12
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI+ ITA 435/2018
PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-6, DELHI ..... Appellant Through: Mr. Sanjay Kumar and Mr. Rahul Chaudhary, Standing Counsel for the Revenue.
versus
M/S MVR CONSULTANTS PVT. LTD.
..... Respondent
Through: Mr. Salil Kapoor and Mr. Sumit Lalchandani, Advocates.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A. K. CHAWLA O R D E R% 13.04.2018
CM APPL. 14350-51/2018(for condonation of delay)
For the reasons mentioned in these applications, the delay in filing and re-filing the appeal is hereby condoned.
Applications stands disposed of.
ITA 435/2018
The Revenue in its appeal under Section 260-A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter ‘the Act’) questions an order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT), which upheld the CIT(A) ‘s findings regarding the legality of the reassessment in these proceedings.
The Assessing Officer sought to re-assess the returns of the
respondent /assessee for Assessment Year 2005-06 questioning the transaction reported for that year, in terms of share capital infused by it. The additions made were the subject matter of an appeal before the Appellate Commissioner [CIT(A)] who set aside the re-assessment holding that there is no tangible material to legitimate it. It was also noted that the original assessment for the AY 2005-06 was completed under Section 143(3) of the Act during the course of which survey too was continued under Section 133(6) of the Act. The ITAT conferred with this view.
This Court is of the opinion that there is no error in the order of the ITAT which correctly surmises that re-assessment was nothing but a second opinion sought to be expressed by the Revenue Authorities. The appeal is, as such, unmerited and consequently dismissed.
S. RAVINDRA BHAT, J
APRIL 13, 2018 nn
A. K. CHAWLA, J
This page reproduces a public-domain court order (Section 52(1)(q)(iv), Copyright Act 1957). Explanations are EaseValue's original analysis. Always read the original order.
Disclaimer: General information only — not legal, tax or professional advice, and no advocate/CA–client relationship is created. AI-generated summaries may contain errors and must be verified against the original court order. EaseValue accepts no liability for reliance on this content. Not a solicitation.
Full disclaimer & Terms.